For a great many reasons I am changing my last name and I think I’ve got a good list so far.
The goals are:
Easy to spell
Easy to pronounce with my accent (I have a slight southern twang)
Common on white Americans
Flows well with the rest of my name which is [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_f]Renee[/name_f]
Is clearly a surname
This is what I have come up with so far. The goals are fairly loose except easy to spell and pronounce, and makes sense on a white American. Any opinions and feedback on the names, keep and lose and new suggestions welcome!
I really like [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_f]Renee[/name_f] [name_m]Kingston[/name_m].
Waters - I really like it, I’m not sure about it with (what I imagine as) a Southern twang. It sounds more like Warders then? But I still think it’s a solid choice.
[name_m]Lewis[/name_m] - It’s ok, I think it works but I don’t love it.
[name_m]Nelson[/name_m] - Since you get full choice, I wouldn’t use [name_m]Nelson[/name_m] because [name_f]Renee[/name_f] runs into it with the double N sound. Not a huge deal, but if you can avoid any flow issues - why not?
[name_m]Powell[/name_m] - I really like this one
[name_m]Sherwood[/name_m] - I do really like this but it feels a bit more storybook-esq because of [name_u]Robin[/name_u] Hood. It works, but I have some mild reservations.
Clearwater - [name_m]Just[/name_m] makes me think of [name_f]Penelope[/name_f] Clearwater in [name_m]Harry[/name_m] [name_m]Potter[/name_m]. I think just Waters is better in terms of both flow and association.
[name_m]Gilbert[/name_m] - I see it more as a first name than a surname, which goes against your ‘identifiably a surname’ criteria
[name_m]Kingston[/name_m] - This one is my favourite for you, while it has been used as a first name it’s not really crossed into ‘this is primarily a first name’ territory yet. And I think [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_m]Kingston[/name_m] sounds cool.
[name_u]Kingsley[/name_u] - For some reason [name_u]Kingsley[/name_u] just doesn’t work as well as [name_m]Kingston[/name_m], I’ve got no idea why.
[name_u]Landry[/name_u] - Again it just doesn’t seem to work for some reason, in my opinion. [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_u]Landry[/name_u] is just not singing to me.
[name_m]Marshall[/name_m] - I really like this, but I do worry it might be too much of a first name. I think it works and I think [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_m]Marshall[/name_m] sounds really good, but I think for your purposes it might not quite fit. (I did know two separate ‘[name_m]Marshall[/name_m]’ families though, so I definitely think of it more as a surname).
[name_u]Stanley[/name_u] - Too much of a first name to me, I know lots of little boys called [name_u]Stanley[/name_u].
Tillwood - Cool surname but I don’t love it for you. [name_f]Amber[/name_f] Tillwood sounds like a description of a building material to me.
[name_u]Wallace[/name_u] - It definitely works, [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_u]Wallace[/name_u]/[name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_f]Renee[/name_f] [name_u]Wallace[/name_u]. I just think you’ve got better options.
[name_m]Gibson[/name_m] - This one really works, I don’t like it as much as I like Waters or [name_m]Kingston[/name_m], but I do think it works really well.
[name_m]Gordon[/name_m] - I feel like [name_f]Amber[/name_f] [name_f]Renee[/name_f] [name_m]Gordon[/name_m] has too much R sound going on, but it’s fine other than that.
Underwood - Again this one feels a bit too storybook-ish and [name_f]Amber[/name_f] Underwood feels very descriptive.
Of your list, I’d keep:
Waters
[name_m]Lewis[/name_m]
[name_m]Powell[/name_m]
[name_m]Kingston[/name_m]
[name_m]Marshall[/name_m]
[name_m]Gibson[/name_m]
Thank you so much for your in depth response and suggestions. You are right Waters doesnt sound as clear as some of the other names on the list. I’m really glad you like [name_m]Kingston[/name_m], I was having some reservations about it. And I think I agree with you about [name_m]Sherwood[/name_m], as much as i love the reference it might be a bit much.